A High Court judge will decide early next year whether a legal challenge against the rules allowing transgender people to use single-sex swimming ponds on Hampstead Heath can proceed to a full judicial review.
The Legal Challenge and Court Hearing
At a permission hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice on December 17, Mrs Justice Lieven told attendees she would publish her judgement “as soon as possible” in the new year. The case was brought by the campaign group Sex Matters against the City of London Corporation, which manages the Heath.
Sex Matters launched legal proceedings in August, arguing that the Corporation’s policy – which allows trans men and trans women to use the pond of their choice – breaches the Equality Act 2010. This follows April’s landmark Supreme Court judgement, which ruled that the term ‘sex’ in the Equality Act refers to biological sex.
The City of London Corporation stated it awaits the outcome and “will continue to contest this case vigorously.”
Background: Ponds Policy and Consultation
Hampstead Heath features three famous swimming ponds: the Highgate Men's Pond, the Kenwood Ladies' Pond, and a mixed pond. The Corporation’s current access policies have been in place since at least 2017.
A major public consultation on the future use of the ponds recently concluded, garnering over 38,000 responses. The Corporation is analysing these and is expected to announce a final decision on any rule changes in March 2026.
In court, Sex Matters’ barrister, Tom Cross KC, argued the Corporation’s position created a “mismatch”. He cited new signs erected in July at the Ladies’ Pond stating it is open to “biological women and trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.” He claimed this conflicted with a since-withdrawn gender identity policy.
Arguments Presented in Court
Sex Matters’ legal submission claimed there is “clear evidence” that women find the presence of men in the Ladies’ Pond space a violation of their dignity and privacy. In a witness statement, the group’s CEO, Maya Forstater, cited concerns from users, including one woman who said she felt “very uncomfortable” and “creepy” knowing male-bodied people could be present.
Representing the City of London Corporation, barrister Daniel Stilitz KC argued the legal claim “completely jumps the gun” and is premature while the consultation is being reviewed. He maintained the Corporation had simply “maintained the status quo” and was keeping an open mind.
Mr Stilitz requested that if permission for a review is granted, the full hearing should not take place before the Corporation’s own decision in March, as the claimant might be satisfied with the outcome.
The judge, Mrs Justice Lieven, will now determine whether there are sufficient grounds for the case to proceed to a full judicial review. Her decision is awaited in early 2026.
